i dont like the die hard series 😮
sure the first holds a nostalgic charm but i thought the repeat plot sequels were ridiculous. if given the choice of what to watch i would likely watch reign of fire. i like dragons. *shrug*
that being said, i thought the appropriate data in a vs. thread was a character's proven abilities and weaknesses...not just being a really super big fan of one over the other.
Originally posted by focus4chumpsRead over the thread. I am not going to rehash all my points to you. Chop chop.
i dont like the die hard series 😮sure the first holds a nostalgic charm but i thought the repeat plot sequels were ridiculous. if given the choice of what to watch i would likely watch reign of fire. i like dragons. *shrug*
that being said, i thought the appropriate data in a vs. thread was a character's proven abilities and weaknesses...not just being a really super big fan of one over the other.
Originally posted by focus4chumpsLook if you want to reread the thread go for it. Lestov has since changed his mind so Zan has won over a poster whereas two fanboys who believe McClane does nothing on his own wins somehow because god protects him.
maybe if you do, everyone with forget that they were rendered moot 46 pages ago. try it out.
the problem with zan is that we're supposed to assume he's capable of badassery. its just supposed to be a given with no cinematic proof. he really doesnt pull off anything exceptional besides aiming a harpoon at target approaching him directly, making quinn bleed a little bit, and coming up with a very creative way of simultaneously rendering his ax useless while feeding a dragon.
Originally posted by focus4chumpsIt wasn't the first dragon he hunted. The guy was obviously a super alpha male with a plan to save humanity that no one else had thought of. If you don't think he was supposed to be portrayed as a badass in the film you probably need to mapquest directions home from work everyday.
the problem with zan is that we're supposed to assume he's capable of badassery. its just supposed to be a given with no cinematic proof. he really doesnt pull off anything exceptional besides aiming a harpoon at target approaching him directly, making quinn bleed a little bit, and coming up with a very creative way of simultaneously rendering his ax useless while feeding a dragon.
Originally posted by quanchi112
It wasn't the first dragon he hunted. The guy was obviously a super alpha male with a plan to save humanity that no one else had thought of.
exactly. we're just supposed to assume from vague anecdotal dialogue that he's totally badass. the problem is that on screen he really was underwhelming. also, he never once described taking down a dragon on his own.
Originally posted by quanchi112
If you don't think he was supposed to be portrayed as a badass in the film you probably need to mapquest directions home from work everyday.
never said he wasnt supposed to be portrayed as a badass. its abundantly clear what he was written in to represent. the problem, again, was that his on screen action was kinda lame and ineffectual.
Originally posted by focus4chumpsThis movie tried to be somewhat realistic with dragons exterminating the majority of mankind. What we see on screen is enough. You might think they tried to pain the picture of a beta male but you're either lying or dense. which is it ?
exactly. we're just supposed to assume from vague anecdotal dialogue that he's totally badass. the problem is that on screen he really was underwhelming. also, he never once described taking down a dragon on his own.never said he wasnt supposed to be portrayed as a badass. its abundantly clear what he was written in to represent. the problem, again, was that his on screen action was kinda lame and ineffectual.
So being killed by the baddest dragon in the movie means he isn't a badass ? Wow.
Originally posted by quanchi112
This movie tried to be somewhat realistic with dragons exterminating the majority of mankind. What we see on screen is enough. You might think they tried to pain the picture of a beta male but you're either lying or dense. which is it ?
hmmm that had nothing to do with anything i said.
Originally posted by quanchi112
So being killed by the baddest dragon in the movie means he isn't a badass ? Wow.
considering the same feat (being eaten by the dragon) could have been accomplished by a quadriplegic infant...guilty as charged.
Originally posted by focus4chumpsHe was realistically portrayed as a badass in an apocalyptic movie with dragons.
hmmm that had nothing to do with anything i said.considering the same feat (being eaten by the dragon) could have been accomplished by a quadriplegic infant...guilty as charged.
Being killed by the alpha dragon is quite a way to go. Due to zan's quest and machinations the dragon went down that day.
Originally posted by quanchi112
He was realistically portrayed as a badass in an apocalyptic movie with dragons.[QUOTE=14194466]Originally posted by quanchi112
[B]Being killed by the alpha dragon is quite a way to go. Due to zan's quest and machinations the dragon went down that day.
brilliant tactician when ordering others indeed. super plan that. nothing to do with being badass but super plan.
you should reevaluate your notion that simply being eaten by a beast makes one tough. in many cases it only makes them idiots. [see morons who sneak into polar bear cages]
LOL focus4chumps, you are totally downplaying Van Zan and at the same time overhyping McClane. Van Zan was far more badass than McClane. Zan got eaten by choice, whereas McClane would have just been lunch whether he wanted it or not. Van took on dragons to the face, whereas McClane had to duck into a massive tunnel to take out a stationary helicopter.
And most importantly, Van Zan actually won. He may have died, but his plan worked, and the dragon race was destroyed because of his decisions. McClane loses on multiple occasions and only gets a last minute win either because Simon wants to be a dumbass or Gabriel wants to molest McClane, or some other massive villain PIS. Van Zan may have died, but that's because he took on a far deadlier villain than McClane's ever dreamed of. Van Zan is a tactical genius who actually laid out and executed a plan to save the human race, and it was a success. McClane's a half wit who has to pray on roofs and then be lucky as hell Hans didn't want to do a patdown and find the gun strapped to his back. That's not tactical thinking. That's just blind luck. McClane didn't win. Villain PIS did. McClane gets no feats from that and Van Zan and his dragon opponents were far more impressive.
Originally posted by Lestov16
LOL focus4chumps, you are totally downplaying Van Zan and at the same time overhyping McClane.
read back bro. i never appraised mcclanes abilities. simply the lack of effective action sequences of van zan which did not include him diving into death's mouth like a retard or punching like a girl.
Originally posted by Lestov16
Zan got eaten by choice
well thats a pretty stupid decision. by doing that he cut off any time he had to distract the dragon, which was the plan, right? (then again maybe since he was so tough he gave the dragon indigestion?). generally when attempting to perform a distraction, one must employ as many diversionary tactics as possible over a long enough period of time to ge effective. (kinda like your debating tactic.)
Originally posted by Lestov16
Van took on dragons to the face
interesting way of describing being helplessly eaten up much the way a bat gobbles up a moth
Originally posted by Lestov16
And most importantly, [b]Van Zan actually won. [/B]
no. quinn won. unless you're suggesting van zan pulled off some ben kenobi shit after being eaten
Originally posted by Lestov16
He may have died, but his plan worked
brilliant tactician. too bad about his poor immediate situational judgement.
Originally posted by Lestov16
and the dragon race was destroyed because of his decisions.
the man with the plan. too bad he knew he was too weak to actually kill the dragon. or else why be the one to dangle on the hook?
"Van took on dragons to the face?" LOL Yeah and down their gullet and eventually through their arses.
You have nothing and continually rattle on like the empty can you are.
McClane wins in entertaining blockbuster after entertaining blockbuster, whilst Van Zan sniffles like the girl he is about being faeces.
Amusement for all.
Originally posted by quanchi112
That would probably be enough to intimidate someone who was a battered victim of a woman's rage. 🙂
You mean the woman he killed, whom would have mutilated Van Zan to death.
Battered refers to making something black and blue...like Van Zan failed to make his opponent despite being given free wailing away time. (And also your knob when you see Van Zan mount Quinn.)
Those were the only injuries ever to have -and I use this term cautiously in this context of course- 'arisen' from that conflict.
McClane wins with 5 movies of ridiculous levels of carnage, and not being a cissy boy, grunting, "Lookatme!Lookatme!" poser like Van Zan.. (also a descriptive coincidentally of his two -maybe one- supporters here)